Social

You’ve been waiting for it, whether you wanted it or not. It comes up in every stadium financing, refinancing, or renovation story throughout the history of time.

It’s the threat to move.

For a variety of issues unique to the Chicago Cubs and Wrigley Field, we haven’t seen it yet with respect to the proposed renovation of Wrigley, and the Cubs’ methods for financing those renovations. Indeed, we haven’t seen the threat even as the Cubs struggle to find reasonable support from the Mayor’s Office, the City of Chicago, the Alderman of their neighborhood, and their neighbors, themselves.

Dave Kaplan today reports – an exclusive – that Mayor Brad Stephens of Rosemont, a suburb northwest of the City (by O’Hare International Airport), has offered 25 acres of land to the Ricketts Family to build a new ballpark for the Chicago Cubs.

“The Chicago Cubs are being held hostage by the neighborhood as they look to run their business,” Stephens told Kaplan in a piece that is well worth reading. “We are willing to offer them a tremendous opportunity if they are interested. Bring the bricks and the ivy and we can get a deal done.”

“Rosemont is very pro-development and we have a long history of experience dealing with big business,” Stephens added. “From my position, you have a wealthy family willing to pay all of the costs of a major renovation project, which will bring a tremendous number of jobs to the community. However, they are not getting cooperation from the neighborhood. Even if the Cubs get a deal done now what will happen when they need something else a year or two years down the road? This will not be the last time the community or the Alderman will be difficult to deal with. The Cubs will never have those kinds of problems if they move to Rosemont.”

It sounds to me like Stephens is a Cubs fan who just wants to see a deal done, but, hey, if you can get one of the preeminent sports franchises to drive economic activity to your doorstep, you take your shot. Good for him. If only Chicago felt the same way.

What’s today’s report really about? Maybe it’s just a matter of Kap getting a scoop (it happens with laudable regularity). But the timing of the story, the nature of the quotes, and the convenience that it affords the Cubs is too great a confluence to ignore. If Rosemont was really making a play for the Cubs, I’m not sure an interview with Dave Kaplan was going to be the way to launch a serious bid.

Tom Ricketts is a smart man. He’s known since day one that, when it comes to the Chicago Cubs, Wrigley Field is the golden goose. He’s also know that pulling out the old “threaten to move”? early in the process would never fly with the extremely, rabidly traditionalistic Cubs fan base.

But now that the City and the neighborhood have proved to be surprisingly intractable, wouldn’t it be convenient to be able to bust out the “threaten to move” card? Doing so yourself in a public statement would be transparent and probably useless – and might alienate a large portion of an already discontented fan base. Tom Ricketts knows this. But would the Cubs, through back-channels, work together with a member of the media and the mayor of a suburb to create the credible pretense of a move?

It certainly is convenient for the Cubs. They now get the “threaten to move” card out in the public sphere without having to anger anyone by actually making the threat. I’m not saying Kap is a mere pawn here (he’s reporting legitimate news) – or the Mayor of Rosemont for that matter. I’m simply saying that these conversations all happen among friends and acquaintances, and ideas are pitched. Guy A talks to Guy B, and an idea for a story with quotes from the Mayor starts to take shape. The Cubs provide some background information when requested, and it all evolves from there. Did the Cubs generate the story? No. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t, on some subterranean level, involved.

Do I think a move for the Cubs out of Wrigley Field is plausible or palatable? I really don’t. The cost savings associated with a move to the suburbs – even if that community foots the entire bill for the stadium (which they have not offered) – could easily be eaten up by the lost value in the old ballpark (Wrigley becomes largely worthless, instead of becoming a billion dollar asset), and reduced attendance. I’m not in a position to speak about the plausibility of regular attendance out in the ‘burbs, but it sure seems like it would take a hit.

Let’s face it: Wrigley Field is special. It’s valuable. It’s important. And a big part of the reason is because of the history and the location. I think the Ricketts Family knows and accepts this reality, even if it puts them in the unenviable position of negotiating without any leverage.

Maybe Kap’s report and Rosemont’s Mayor’s offer helps. I hope it does. But actually moving the Cubs? I don’t think that’s the route to be taken, because I’m not sure it actually helps the Cubs long-term.

I remain open to convincing, though, should this story prove to be more than a modestly clever, but hollow, “threat to move.”

Jason. I’m with you concerning PNC. Having never been there to see a game, it is (imo), aesthetically, a visual treat from what I am able to see of it on tv. Other than Wrigley, I can’t think of a ball park better integrated into its site. I hope to see a game there one day when the Cubs are in Pitt——at least that’s my wish.

Now….As it may, or may not apply to a Wrigley exit, I have misgivings, and, in fact, I think you put your finger on one misgiving when you relate your “four generations” experience. That’s a history that should be permitted to welcome future family get-togethers. It’s a personal insight that is generally lost in the wake of “sentiment has no cash value” arguments.

There will be a time Wrigley Field will die. Will it come when the Cubs make the WS? Don’t know……but on reflection, that would be a nice time to close the door on the past to open the one to the future.

It’s played during the day, outside, where we are spared the repeated bludgeoning of commercial advertisements and rap music every time a batter approaches home plate.

Pack up the ivy and scoreboard and bricks and move to the suburbs? That’s like trying to get a 100 year old oak to grow in the back of a pickup. It’s the same tree, but it ain’t got no roots.

It’s laughable to expect that dropping parts of Wrigley in a different spot would engender the same feelings as years of history in one location. Would your house be the same in a different neighborhood?

You want to modernize? Fine, but where does it stop? Hot tubs down the right field line? A koi pond in the bullpen? A planetarium style observatory in the upper deck? Hey, I know, how about a movie playing on the centerfield jumbotron with headphones to rent for 40 bucks? We all multi-task nowadays, right?

How about just park your butt in your seat and watch the game….

And did I hear someone say tailgating? Come on, that’s football.

Extra-wide padded seats in a climate controlled indoor water park? No thanks. I want the narrow, weather-hardened chair that make me feel the cold ground below and keeps me on the edge of my seat.

All the good intentions of providing comfortable surroundings for the players would probably have the opposite effect. After all, being comfortable in calculus class always meant a lot more dozing off.

And yes, I’d like to tell the mayor and the alderman to go take a flying leap, but to me that’s not the point. More revenue and a cleaner facility is not the answer; better talent evaluation and on-field accountability are….

Repeat after me: “a new field does not equal a winning team.” Fantasize all you want about individual urinals in the restrooms, but that won’t put a .300 hitting gold glove at third base.

When the Cubs once again win it all, I want it to be at Wrigley “the real”, not Wrigley “the pretender”.

I want to feel the power, the vibration of a World Series clincher at Wrigley Field in Chicago; not the sterile hum at Comcast Stadium in Rosemont.

Sorry, but taking the Cubs out of Wrigley would be like taking the diamond out of the ring. It’s meaning would be lost.

Interesting on The Twitters

Beautiful BN Apparel

BN on Video

Post Categories

Site Archives

Get In Touch

Search

Disclaimer

In addition to news, Bleacher Nation publishes both rumor and opinion, as well as information reported by other sources. Information on Bleacher Nation may contain errors or inaccuracies, though we try to avoid them. Links to content and the quotation of material from other news sources are not the responsibility of Bleacher Nation. Photos used either are the property of Bleacher Nation, are used with permission, are fair use, or are believed to be in the public domain. Legitimate requests to remove copyrighted photos not in the public domain will be honored promptly. Comments by third parties are neither sponsored or endorsed by Bleacher Nation.

Bleacher Nation Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Bleacher Nation is a private media site, and it is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago Cubs. Neither MLB nor the Chicago Cubs have endorsed, supported, directed, or participated in the creation of the content at this site, or in the creation of the site itself. It's just a media site that happens to cover the Chicago Cubs.

Bleacher Nation is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.